I've said it once and I'll say it again. Halo 3's maps plain suck. They're bad in just about every way. With the soon to be released DLC I'm hoping and praying that Bungie can redeem themselves and even get me interested in Halo 3 again. So what do I think is wrong with Halo 3's maps? Well read on.

There has to be some attention given to the make up a Halo game here. It's an interesting thing to consider Halo 1 maps in relation to those that had vehicles. Only the two big maps (Blood Gulch and Sidewinder) had them and the rest of the maps played without vehicles.

What happened in some respects in Halo 2 and 3 is that the addition of vehicles on smaller maps ruined a lot of them. The smaller environment and tendency for these to be more open then the hoard of Halo 1 maps that were indoor room based means that vehicles did one of many bad things.

Maps like Ascension and Snowbound come to mind. One vehicle only that was more then a transporter (like the Mongoose) but rather a killing machine. Coupled with at times one weapon that could take these down that was often in the hands of the team that had the vehicle. It's not so much the vehicle that ruined the maps but rather the fact that Halo weapons for the most part are useless against them.

Anyway I won't go on but rather get back to the map design problems I see. I want to post a little bit about the major shift in Bungie to maps devoid of teleporters and what they can bring to a map.

With Halo 1 most maps had teleporters. HEH comes to mind as one that didn't but I can’t think of any others off hand. What they brought to the game was creative thinking and changed the way in which a game played. When I first started playing Team Fortress 2 I was fascinated with the way they brought teleporters into game play and maps. For those that don't know one of the classes (this being the Engineer) could make a teleporter entrance and then an exit anywhere on the map. All the time giving the players a new way in which to construct a path and different method of map navigation.

I can only think that there was some kind of thinking behind this for Bungie. I'm puzzled that more hasn't been asked of this by the fans. Instead it's not mentioned at all really. Simply ignored altogether.

Perhaps the major problem I have with Halo 3 maps is the size. They're all big and getting from one side to the other seems to take too long. Movement is slower then ever and the terrain of a Halo map now more restrictive then ever. It's as if Bungie wants everyone to stay put in the one place. Even making the one thing that can transport quickly (man cannon) nothing more then a target identifier.

I've always been a big fan of symmetrical maps in Halo. A lot of other FPS games don't tend to use this as a basis of good map creation but with all Halo games I often tend to think that this is the best way to go.

The difference is that Halo is a game with a high focus on objective game types and therefore a symmetrical make up always works well for balance. With Halo 2 and 3 Bungie has moved largely away from this design. Focusing instead on Offense/defense game play on asymmetrical maps (Burial Mounds, High ground etc). The symmetrical maps have remained (Narrows, Isolation and even in most ways The Pit). What has happened however is that making something symmetrical has not always been just an argument that it is balanced. Protection, cover and equal distance for objective movement can be taken away by default map weapons and things like spawn forcing.

Adding asymmetrical elements is great and does help with recognition of different parts of the map. Like the differing bases in Sanctuary. For the most part I think that both maps in Halo 2 and 3 are poor at best. Some are okay while a fair portion of them are terrible so far as design. Having said that the maps in Halo 2 are a great deal better then those in Halo 3. I'll run through a couple of the problems with examples and comparisons.

Firstly I will compare Lockout to Guardian. These two maps are very similar in structure and size and even Bungie has stated that the much loved Lockout will not make a come back to Halo 3 because we have Guardian.

Lockout is a fun map but only really useable for Slayer. Like Guardian it's asymmetrical and therefore the balance doesn't exist to make capture the flag and other objective game types fair and balanced. Both maps are basically made up of a centre area which is largely exposed. Surrounded by four other areas of game play.

On Lockout while in any one area (Sniper Tower, Lift Tower, BR Tower and "Library") you have a view of the other areas with differing amounts. What remains is that you can fire upon all the other areas in some way and this means the game has both a very present close quarter action and mid/long range duels.

Guardian on the other hand fails in this area. The sniper tower has a good view of the Lift Tower (directly opposite) but the other areas are primarily hidden. What happens is the good mix of combat in differing distances is replaced by a map that is largely close quarters. These kind of maps not only limit mid and long range weapon use (and therefore the desire to pick these weapons up) but also encourage players to arm themselves with the huge amount of close quarter weapons and camp.

The idea was still there to make the map like Lockout but a few things were badly designed. For a start the grassy area is sunk very low. Meaning not only is it unrewarding to fire on other areas from it but it has to have a huge amount of cover leaving it secluded. The same goes for the area where the flare spawns. That whole area is a jumbled mess of halls and rooms with extremely limited ability to involve combat with any other area outside of it. In short the general line of sight in Guardian detracts from advanced game play and shooting skill. Making the map a campers paradise where the hunter is in fact the hunted.

Burial Mounds gets much undue criticism. However the map is very good and the problem lies more in spawning. The defensive team needs to have a good line of sight on the offensive base. This means that the offensive team is at the mercy of the defensive team in the area of spawn killing. I'm yet to see a FPS game that has been able to overcome the problems of spawn. Halo 1 had it's fair share and in truth Halo 2 and 3 are no worse then the first game. It's just that the games are played differently and therefore the maps highlight the problems with the spawn system.

Getting back to Halo 3. Probably the two maps that stand out the most are Construct and Epitah. I believe Bungie got carried away with both these maps. It's a good idea to limit the amount of levels in a map but Construct is just oever the top. Another good idea is something that I think HEH did well and maps like Midship. What Midship did was make going from one side of the map to the other a decision based upon various things. The quick route was always the more exposed. While the route with the best cover and vantage points was always around the outside and therefore the slowest. This map shows the simple elements that make a leveled map work and work damn well. In hindsight Midship is proably the best map of all the Halo games. Wizard in Halo 1 (renamed Warlock for Halo 2) also did this well.

This simple idea that works so well makes me extremely puzzled when I consider a map like Construct. Here is a map that is not symmetrical like the last two I mentioned. Therefore making it useful for merely slayer, oddball and things like VIP. However what has become apparent is that "capturing" the top level is basically how to win the game. Not only is the top level a safe haven from a line of sight from bottom up (because it's so far up). But it also makes advancing on this level a very hard thing. Theres a long exposed walk or 3 lifts which can be camped with relative ease. It's a classic example if map making gone wrong. It also makes a majority of the map rather pointless and just a spawning point for the frustrated.

Now I'm not saying that every map has to be the arena style of Midship but rather every map has to offer various things. For starters a vantage point like one that can exist in a leveled map must have it's short comings. Whether that be restrictive movement, or simply limited cover or increased exposure. With Halo 1's maps there was something about this aspect. To a degree there was no real benefit in many of the maps in being in the one area for too long. Yeah okay top of Prisoner and the like are exceptions. However the maps for the most part were much better in terms of navigation, alternative paths and getting the plus and minus thing going that I mentioned about different areas. The power up/power weapon spawn system had something to do with it but in the end Halo 3's maps compare poorly to the first two games. Good luck Bungie.